Remote Alaska Communities Energy Efficiency Competition: Energy Efficiency for the Gem of the Yukon (Final Report)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade, the City of Ruby has been proactive in working to reduce cost and energy use in the community. Ruby (Tl’aa’ologhe) is a remote city in Alaska located on the south bank of the Yukon River near the Kilbuck-Kuskokwim Mountains, about 50 air miles east of Galena and 230 air miles west of Fairbanks. As of 2019, the community has a population of over 150 people and most of Ruby’s residents are Koyukon Athabascan. Ruby has a long history of promoting local efficiency and clean energy in an effort to become more sustainable. Between 2007-2010, the community hosted Alaska’s first demonstration of an in-river hydrokinetic test project, sponsored by the Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council. In 2011, a 5kW solar photo-voltaic (PV) array was installed by the Interior Regional Housing Authority. In 2012, the community had a new power plant constructed by the Alaska Energy Authority that supplies waste heat to the washeteria, clinic and public safety garage, saving the community more than 4,000 gallons of heating fuel per year. The clinic, constructed by the Tanana Chiefs Conference, is one of the most energy efficient buildings in the interior and utilizes new building efficiency standards that were passed by the tribes. It has a 5kW solar PV array that provides energy into the local electric grid and offsets approximately 20% of the annual energy use. Building on this legacy, the City of Ruby entered into Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Remote Alaska Communities Energy Efficiency Competition (RACEE) in 2016, pledging to reduce per-capita energy use 15% by 2020. During the second phase of the competition, 13 communities including Ruby were provided funding for tailored technical assistance to measure energy use and create energy efficiency plans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".